REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, petitioner, vs. JENNIFER B. CAGANDAHAN, respondent.

G.R. No. 166676. September 12, 2008

FACTS:
Jennifer Cagandahan filed a Petition for Correction of Entries in Birth Certificate before the RTC,
Branch 33 of Siniloan, Laguna she alleged that she was born on January 13, 1981 and was registered as a
female in the Certificate of Live Birth but while growing up, she developed secondary male
characteristics and was diagnosed to have Congenital Adrenal Hyperplasia (CAH) which is a condition
where persons thus afflicted possess both male and female characteristics. She then alleged that upon
growing up, for all interests and appearances as well as in mind and emotion, she has become a male
person. Thus, she prayed that her birth certificate be corrected such that her gender be changed from
female to male and her first name be changed from Jennifer to Jeff.

To prove her claim, respondent testified and presented the testimony of Dr. Michael Sionzon who
issued a medical certificate stating that respondent's condition is known as CAH. He explained that
genetically respondent is female but because her body secretes male hormones, her female organs did not
develop normally and she has two sex organs — female and male. He testified that this condition is very
rare, that respondent's uterus is not fully developed because of lack of female hormones, and that she has
no monthly period. He further testified that respondent's condition is permanent and recommended the
change of gender because respondent has made up her mind, adjusted to her chosen role as male, and the
gender change would be advantageous to her.

RTC granted respondent’s petition.

Subsequently, a petition by the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) was filed seeking a reversal
of the ruling of the RTC granting the change of name from Jennifer to Jeff Cagandahan and change of
gender from female to male.

ISSUE: Whether or not the trial court erred in ordering the correction of entries in the birth certificate of
respondent to change her sex or gender, from female to male, on the ground of her medical condition
known as CAH, and her name from "Jennifer" to "Jeff", under Rules 103 and 108 of the Rules of Court.

RULING: No.

Rule 108 provides that: “xxx...SEC. 2. Entries subject to cancellation or correction. — Upon good
and valid grounds, the following entries in the civil register may be cancelled or corrected: (a) births; (b)
marriages; (c) deaths; (d) legal separations; (e) judgments of annulments of marriage; (f) judgments
declaring marriages void from the beginning; (g) legitimations; (h) adoptions; (i) acknowledgments of
natural children; (j) naturalization; (k) election, loss or recovery of citizenship; (l) civil interdiction; (m)
judicial determination of filiation; (n) voluntary emancipation of a minor; and (o) changes of name.

Furthermore, Rule 108 applies only to substantial changes and corrections in entries in the civil
register. Under Rep. Act No. 9048, a correction in the civil registry involving the change of sex is not a
mere clerical or typographical error. It is a substantial change for which the applicable procedure is Rule
108 of the Rules of Court.

In this case, Respondent undisputedly has CAH. This condition causes the early or
"inappropriate" appearance of male characteristics. A person, like respondent, with this condition
produces too much androgen, a male hormone. A newborn who has XX chromosomes coupled with CAH
usually has a (1) swollen clitoris with the urethral opening at the base, an ambiguous genitalia often
appearing more male than female; (2) normal internal structures of the female reproductive tract such as
the ovaries, uterus and fallopian tubes; as the child grows older, some features start to appear male, such
as deepening of the voice, facial hair, and failure to menstruate at puberty. More commonly, an intersex
individual is considered as suffering from a "disorder" which is almost always recommended to be
treated, whether by surgery and/or by taking lifetime medication in order to mold the individual as neatly
as possible into the category of either male or female.

Ultimately, we are of the view that where the person is biologically or naturally intersex the
determining factor in his gender classification would be what the individual, like respondent, having
reached the age of majority, with good reason thinks of his/her sex. Respondent here thinks of himself as
a male and considering that his body produces high levels of male hormones (androgen) there is
preponderant biological support for considering him as being male. Sexual development in cases of
intersex persons makes the gender classification at birth inconclusive. It is at maturity that the gender of
such persons, like respondent, is fixed.

Respondent here has simply let nature take its course and has not taken unnatural steps to arrest
or interfere with what he was born with. And accordingly, he has already ordered his life to that of a male.
Respondent could have undergone treatment and taken steps, like taking lifelong medication, to force his
body into the categorical mold of a female but he did not. He chose not to do so. Nature has instead taken
its due course in respondent's development to reveal more fully his male characteristics.

In the absence of evidence that respondent is an "incompetent" and in the absence of evidence to
show that classifying respondent as a male will harm other members of society who are equally entitled to
protection under the law, the Court affirms as valid and justified the respondent's position and his
personal judgment of being a male.

As for respondent's change of name under Rule 103, this Court has held that a change of name is
not a matter of right but of judicial discretion, to be exercised in the light of the reasons adduced and the
consequences that will follow. The trial court's grant of respondent's change of name from Jennifer to Jeff
implies a change of a feminine name to a masculine name. Considering the consequence that respondent's
change of name merely recognizes his preferred gender, we find merit in respondent's change of name.
Such a change will conform with the change of the entry in his birth certificate from female to male.